National media skewers Microsoft for reversal on anti-discrimination bill

The local story that’s making national headlines is the tale of the pansy-ass hypocrites at Microsoft who withdrew their longtime support for HB 1515, the gay and lesbian anti-discrimination bill, after pressure from a Redmond-based, Evangelical mega-church.

While I’ve been pretty darn loud in expressing my personal disgust over the defeat of HB 1515, I totally missed the boat on Microsoft’s role — or lack thereof. Fortunately a lot of other local bloggers have provided excellent coverage, including Evergreen Politics and Pacific Views. But the best local commentary I’ve seen thus far comes from Columbian Watch, both on the Microsoft debacle and on yesterday’s defeat of the bill.

This is a really important issue, and not just because HB 1515 was a deserving bill, or because it’s fun to stick it to Microsoft. It is important because it demonstrates how powerful the right-wing religious extremists have become, and how dangerously close they are to establishing their neo-fascist theocracy. That a powerful company like Microsoft, with a long history of supporting gay rights… or a politician like Sen. Finkbeiner, who has previously supported the legislation… would feel compelled to bow to pressures from the Dominionist forces, should scare everybody who naively believes that our basic human rights are somehow protected by that yellowed scrap of parchment on display at the National Archives.

I need to run out, but I have a lot more to say on this issue. And I intend to say it while I still can.

You must have your democrats confused with someone else… like Republicans:

Congressional Quarterly reported that, in the House of Representatives, 80% of Republicans (138 for, 38 against) voted for the Civil Rights Act as opposed to 61% of Democrats (152 for, 96 against). In the Senate, 82% of Republicans (27 for, 6 against) 69% of Democrats (46 for, 21 against) voted for the Act while 69% of Democrats (46 for, 21 against)did. All southern Democrats voted against the Act.

It was the Republicans, not the democrats, that passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964.

“The House of Representatives debated the bill for nine days before passing H.R. 7152 in February 1964. Four-hundred-twenty House members voted on the bill: 172 Republicans and 248 Democrats. A little better than 80% of the Republicans voted in favor (138) while only a little more than 61% of the Democrats voted in favor (152).”

“When the House-passed bill reached the Senate, 18 Democrats, especially Southern Democrats, formed an opposition force and began filibuster to postpone a vote on the legislation. They were hoping that support for civil rights legislation would falter and the presidential candidate, George Wallace, a segregationist from Alabama, would do well in the primaries.”

“The Republican Party was not so badly split as the Democrats by the civil rights issue. Only one Republican senator, John Tower of Texas, participated in the filibuster against the bill. The Civil Rights bill eventually passed the Senate on a 73-to-27 vote. The Democratic supermajority in the Senate split their vote 46 (69%) for and 21 (31%) against. The Republicans, on the other hand, split their vote 27 for (82%) and 6 against (18%). Thus, the no vote consisted of 78% Democrats. Further, the infamous 74-day filibuster was led by the Southern Democrats, who overwhelmingly voted against the act.”

“In point of fact, since 1933, Republicans had a more positive record on civil rights than the Democrats. In the 26 major civil rights votes since 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80% of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96% of the votes. These are facts that cannot be disputed.”

In fact, Northern Democrats were even more solidly in favor of the Civil Rights Act than Northern Republicans—although both parties were responsible for passing the bill. Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson signed it into law.

I expected to see way more outrage by the HA queens on this one. Geez, it has been just one defeat after another for you lefty’s. You are being phased out, in gigantic sections at a time. Next, the WA Gov and then OLY. Have your tea parties while you can. HB 1515 made the new york times today. LOL

Your revisionist view is your misinterpretation of the congressional record.

“It was the Republicans, not the democrats, that passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964.”

Wrong-o. While Republican Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen pushed the bill, it was Northern Democrats and Republicans together who passed the Civil Rights Act, and a Democratic President who signed it.

“The Republican Party was not so badly split as the Democrats by the civil rights issue.”

Without considering geography, it looks like the Democrats’ votes were more split—because at that point there was only 1 Republican Senator and 10 Representatives from the South. I’m more inclined to believe that “[t]he bill divided both political parties and engendered a long-term change in the demographics of both.” (Wikipedia)

“Southern Democrats . . . were hoping that support for civil rights legislation would falter and the presidential candidate, George Wallace, a segregationist from Alabama, would do well in the primaries.”

If you’ll check your history books, Lyndon Johnson won the Democratic nomination for President in 1964. Winning his party’s nomination nationally on the Republican side was senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona, who notably voted against the Civil Rights Act bill. Goldwater won only his home state of Arizona and five of the Deep South states (Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina)—4 of which had never voted Republican since the election of 1876. LBJ, with his pro-civil rights agenda, won 61% of the popular vote and 90.5% of the electoral vote.

The facts are there; your view doesn’t fit them. So I stand by what I said: “You just don’t get it,” your revisionist view is wrong.

“In point of fact, since 1933, Republicans had a more positive record on civil rights than the Democrats.”

Ahem, since 1933??? WTF? That’s some kind of distortion of the civil rights era. I imagine that makes it easier to claim a more positive record for Republicans. But then, since 1965 the Republican Party hasn’t been so stellar on civil rights. Shame.

I’d think twice before citing that good ol racist Lyndon Johnson. As Democrats are want to do, he acted in ways that were expedient toward his own goals

“As a Texas senator, Johnson’s support for civil rights was part of his move in a conservative direction as the presidential election approached. Previously, although he had refused to join with other Southern Democrats in their manifesto protesting the 1954 U.S. Supreme Court decision on segregation in public schools, he had regularly voted with the Southern Democrats against civil rights bills. In 1948 he had vigorously denounced President Truman’s civil rights program. In 1960, however, he had moved to the right in order to position himself in the political center.”

OK, now that’s just inexcusable, “You just don’t get it.” And awfully indicative of your ethical standards for yourself. Let’s see that (uncited) quote again:

Johnson’s support for civil rights was part of his move in a conservative direction as the presidential election approached. . . . In 1960, however, he had moved to the right in order to position himself in the political center.

“Civil rights provided the most significant illustration of Johnson’s techniques and their consequences. In 1957 he faced civil rights proposals by the Eisenhower administration that were supported by Northern Democrats and opposed by Southerners. This situation posed the possibility of further Republican gains among black voters in the North. Seeking a compromise that would hold his party together, Johnson obtained a narrowing of the bill to focus on voting rights and a change providing jury trials for those accused of violating the voting rights of others. The result was the first civil rights law since Reconstruction.

Johnson’s support for civil rights, especially the very strong support he provided for a second law in 1960, also concerned chiefly with voting, was part of his move in a liberal direction as the presidential election approached. Previously, although he had refused to join with other Southerners in their manifesto protesting the 1954 U.S. Supreme Court decision on segregation in public schools, he had regularly voted with the South against civil rights bills. In 1948 he had vigorously denounced President Truman’s civil rights program. In 1960, however, although he had not become a militant liberal on civil rights, he had moved to a moderate position. At the same time, on economic questions he had emerged as a moderate liberal.”

So not only are you quoting an article about his views in 1960, four years prior to the Civil Rights Act, but you purposely misquoted the article. Fuck you, I’m not debating a dishonest person like you anymore.

Hmmm, from what I understand the polls show that most Americans were shocked by all the Schiavo weirdness promoted by the Republicans, most people think kindly of the filibuster, most people don’t like being told they are not going to Heaven because of their political views, and Rick fuckadog Santorum is behind in the polls for his re-election. Don’t be surprised if he decides not to run for re-election and announces for President instead.

These Conservatives and their Revisionist History; I can’t believe they are now claiming they supported Civil Rights! Holy smoke. Why do you think that Strom Thurmond bolted the Democratic Party? Why do you think the South went from being solidly Democratic to solidly Republican overnight? Next thing you guys will be claiming John F. Kennedy, although while he was President the Republicans did everything they could to thwart him, and maybe even killed him. homesteadbook.com

Actually, the Democrats “didn’t get it” when they snuffed out the original attempt at a civil rights bill in 1874. Or doesn’t the liberal history book go back that far? The roots of the KKK are in the Democrat party – they are the ones that birthed the organization. And Robert KKK Byrd is still in their party.

In one stroke, those people have just turbocharge the Linux community. Now, I’m NOT one of the Linux geeks. But I’m here to predict that Microsoft is going to get far more serious competition from that direction as the result of stabbing gay people in the back. Just wait. They are going to rue the day they ever caved into that wingnut redneck from the church in Redmond. Man, what a stupid move.

Goldy @ 4–“…Just like Democrats “didn’t get it” when they supported civil rights….” Yeah, they were right to draw attention to that. Now they would be right to either leave it alone or start telling blacks to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps and stop making them into perpetual ‘victims’ that must rely on the good ol’ boy party to keep them down on the…er, I mean HELP them know who to vote for.

So let me make sure I understand this correctly. MS has high level meetings local leaders and guv’ment snobs to ponder the impact their support will have. After such close examination, they choose not to choose, fearing negitive consequenses. But the reality is damn if they do, damn if they dont.

What I find ironic is that, and please correct me if i’m off the mark here (I know some one will), but dosen’t the Gates foundation help folks WITH the AIDS virus? WAIT, don’t answer, let me quote the FIRST PARAGRAPH ON THEIR SITE…

“In many parts of the world, advances in treatment have dramatically reduced the number of people who die because of HIV/AIDS.But the disease still kills more than 3 million people each year.To end the epidemic, we must find ways to stop the spread of the disease. Learn more about prevention and the fight against HIV/AIDS.”

Right, so it’s okay to offer the increadible support and resources (don’t thing for one second i’m disrespecting the Gates foundation, i’m not) they offer…THEN, let a conservative preacher (a black man none the less!?) threaten to begin a christian boycot of MS products, AND THEN BACK DOWN!?! Have they no shame?

Considering the MS is not the end all be all of computing, (firefox browser on a linux box) whats next? Idle threats against, say Boeing (wont fly on their planes)…or Starbucks ( the hell you say)??

What the fuck is HAPENING HERE folks?!? What REALLY did we just witness? I can hear (and respect the opinion of) the neo-cons here…” we’re tired of the fags trying to get special treatment” but this move is chickenshit! And to see a black preacher threaten MS with a boycot if they support queers?? Thats a double oxymoron!!

Discusting, Truly discusting! If I were a member of his “flock” i’d gladly bring some good folk into “HIS house” and remind him WHO HE IS SUPPOSED TO BE SPEAKING FOR!!!

Goldy, I know you think Jesus was a fraud, and thats cool…but a “Preacher” pushing intolrance is unforgivable. Maybe hes lost track of his roots…pardon the pun…no, don’t! And for MS to think their product is THAT important…please!

Goldy and gang, You go right ahead and start a “movement” against Microsoft. Maybe you can get Gov CG and some powerful demos on board. Don’t forget to sign up the public employee unions too! If you whine loud enough it will really help all the “Progressive” causes you guys espouse constantly. Maybe if the “screw Microsoft” movement is a success you can find some excuse to go after Starbucks, Boeing and Paccar.

this is all part of the process at reclaiming America. you are going to feel the growing pains for a while as we have only just begun. Liberal friends, this is predicted to last an entire generation. How long is that in liberal pet years? Ride that copnservative wave.

“reclaiming America”? Did it get taken away while you weren’t looking? Or do you mean the “Jesuifcation” of America? Kinda like the civil rights era, when folks were fighing to give blacks equal treatment? It’s NO damn different. Peoples hatred of those different or misunderstood is part of WHY this country exists in the first place. Just cause YOU dont like, know or care to understand those different from yourself dosent make them any less HUMAN. Maybe you should look that up in your bible and see what Jesus said about that. You could be in for a shock.

What generation is this, prey tell? Gen-x? Gen-why? WHO? And what genius is making this prediction, your unmidigated source of truth, Rush “I’m a junkie” Limbaugh?

And we’re riding that wave, honey…remember me suggesting you learn to swim?

Hey DD why don’t you try to get that boycott started against Microsoft? The better target for the wrath of you lefties would be your own democratic party leadership. You guys run the whole state government in case you haven’t noticed. Goldy and the lefty power brokers are only trying to deflect blame by going after Microsoft on this. They know how easily manipulated the lefties are and the response to this idiotic attack on Microsoft proves it.

DD, I might as well focus it at you. Venting at the preacher or at MS is way off the mark here. The only people responsible for this bill failing are the demo leadership, thats my point. The whiners screaming at MS or the preacher are exercising their base by this

#29, what I don’t know about computer programming will fill lots o’books, but so will what I do know about gay people. Microsoft’s operating system is already vulnerable. No one is starting from scratch here. All I’m saying is that Microsoft just gave a bunch of people a big incentive to put a whole lot more effort into knocking them back.

My prediction is that some silly faggot out there is going to look at this and say, “Yup, I always thought it was about time we have a version of Linux that looks, feels and operates exactly like Windows.” And some other silly faggot will say, “Yeah, I think it’s time someone made that Open Office program into a real kick-ass competitor to Microsoft’s cash cow.”

It’s not going to take a whole lot of people. A relative handful of really pissed off people can do more damage than you think. We’ll see.

So your just fishing for reactions then? How is Demo “leadership” responsible for what MS does. Explain that one away. I didnt touch the Demo “leadership” because that is not my issue or point.In fact, all I said was “guv’ment snobs”…I dont care which side of the fence they were on.

My point is EXACTLY the preacher and his actions. Actions which will be judged. And lets ignore the rest, shall we?

Microsoft and Washington’s Workplace Fairness Legislation Take Action: Tell Microsoft to Reinstate Their Support for Workplace Fairness Legislation The funny thing is, I was at a meeting on the Microsoft campus today when I recevied the above call to action from the HRC. Talk about coincidence!…

Microsoft and Washington’s Workplace Fairness Legislation Take Action: Tell Microsoft to Reinstate Their Support for Workplace Fairness Legislation The funny thing is, I was at a meeting on the Microsoft campus today when I recevied the above call to action from the HRC. Talk about coincidence!…

Please Donate

I appreciate feeling appreciated. Also, money.

Currency:

Amount:

Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?

Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!

Search HA

Follow Goldy

HA Commenting Policy

It may be hard to believe from the vile nature of the threads, but yes, we have a commenting policy. Comments containing libel, copyright violations, spam, blatant sock puppetry, and deliberate off-topic trolling are all strictly prohibited, and may be deleted on an entirely arbitrary, sporadic, and selective basis. And repeat offenders may be banned! This is my blog. Life isn’t fair.